Hot Source…Cites violation of child rights
Karen Baaba Sam, a young mother embroiled in a high-profile child custody battle, has filed a lawsuit at the High Court in Accra against The New Crusading Guide newspaper, its publisher Kweku Baako Jnr, and its editor, Ernest Addo.
She alleges that the newspaper published a “false, malicious and defamatory” story that has caused severe emotional and reputational harm to her and her six-year-old daughter.
According to a writ of summons filed on 11 July 2025, Ms Baaba Sam, suing on her own behalf and on behalf of her daughter, referred to in the documents as minor “O”, is seeking several remedies. These include a declaration that the publication was defamatory, general and aggravated damages, a public apology and retraction, and an injunction preventing any further related publications.
The legal action stems from a front-page story published by The New Crusading Guide on 2 July 2025, headlined: “Karen Baaba Sam Elopes With Child… Hops Out With ‘Boyfriend’ On Brussels Airline After Losing Custody Battle.”
The article, which featured photographs of Ms Baaba Sam and her daughter, alleged that she had fled Ghana illegally with the child, in breach of a court order, following an adverse ruling in an ongoing custody dispute.
In her statement of claim, Ms Baaba Sam rejected the story’s assertions, describing the publication as “a grossly malicious account of the court proceedings, plainly calculated to cast Karen Baaba Sam as a criminal who has eloped from justice.”
She detailed that the domestic abuse and custody disputes have been before multiple courts since April 2024, following years of what she described as persistent violent abuse at the hands of her former partner and the child’s father, Kwadwo Adjei, alias Nana Adjei. These alleged abuses, she said, compelled her to end the relationship.
“The pending cases are yet to proceed to trial, and judgments are yet to be delivered by the respective courts, in addition to several associated suits that have since been filed,” her statement read.
She further explained that, while the matter remains unresolved, the courts have issued several interlocutory orders since April 2024. Notably, on 24 March 2025, a court granted her interim access to the child on weekdays, while the father was granted weekend access.
However, on 11 June 2025, a different court, at the request of Mr Adjei, quashed those interim orders. Following that development, Ms Baaba Sam said she lawfully collected her daughter from school.
Twenty-one days later, during the school holidays, Ms Baaba Sam says she was inundated with calls and anxious enquiries on the morning of Wednesday, 2 July 2025, from family, friends, colleagues, and acquaintances who were concerned about her and her daughter’s whereabouts and safety.
She states that it was during these calls that she was informed that photographs of herself and her child had been published on the front page of The New Crusading Guide (Vol. 17, No. 080), accompanied by a bold headline that accused her of eloping.
In her pleadings, Ms Baaba Sam explains that the image of her and her daughter was one of just four coloured headline stories, and the second most prominent front-page item, directing readers to the main story on page 3.
She alleges that the page 3 story, authored by the third defendant (editor Ernest Addo), “devoted half a page to gross falsehoods laced with half-truths, deceptive language, and criminal insinuations,” using terms such as “slippery lady”, “fled the shores of Ghana”, and “trafficked the girl child from Ghana” in what she described as a wholly misleading and malicious portrayal of court proceedings.
“At the time of the publication, the custody and domestic abuse proceedings had not concluded and were still before the courts,” she stated, noting that after the court quashed the interim access orders, she legally picked up her daughter from school on 11 June 2025.
“Despite this,” she added, “The New Crusading Guide claimed she had ‘fled the shores of Ghana,’ ‘trafficked the girl child,’ and had done so with the help of a male acquaintance, whom the article labelled as her boyfriend.” The publication further alleged that “available evidence, including a flight manifest and other documentation, showed that Baaba departed Ghana on a Brussels flight on 13 June…”
“These statements were not only false and misleading,” Ms Baaba Sam asserted, “but also intentionally framed to portray her as a ‘slippery lady’ and a fugitive engaged in child trafficking. She described the use of language such as ‘fled the shores of Ghana’, ‘trafficked the girl child’, and ‘refused to return the child’ as criminalising, slanderous and damaging to her dignity and safety.”
Ms Baaba Sam further contended that the conduct of the defendants “follows a consistent pattern that has persisted since January 2025, designed to expose her to emotional, psychological, and physical abuse and threats, in breach of statutory protections for individuals in her position and for the welfare of her infant child.”
She accused the defendants of “not only defaming and lowering her esteem and reputation in the minds of the public, but of pursuing a crusading campaign for commercial gain, exploiting the traumatic experiences she and her daughter continue to endure through persistent, false, sensational and injurious publications.”
She further stated that, in pursuit of that campaign, the defendants “flagrantly disregarded laws that prohibit identifying a child in domestic abuse and custody matters.”
She also alleged that the defendants obtained assistance from persons in both public and private sectors, particularly in the security, communication, and information services, with the financial backing of Kwadwo Adjei, to procure statutorily restricted records relating to her and her child, to advance their “defamatory, damaging and injurious” agenda.
Ms Baaba Sam added that images published in the newspaper were unlawfully sourced from CCTV surveillance footage at airports, in blatant violation of the rights of both herself and her daughter.
Ms Baaba Sam further indicated in her statement of claim that the “conduct of the defendants follows a consistent pattern that has continued from January 2025, and orchestrated to expose her to emotional, psychological and physical abuses and threats, and in complete violation of statutory laws for the protection of persons such as her and her infant child from harm and injuries from such publications.”
“The Defendants are not only engaged in defaming and lowering her esteem and reputation in the eyes and minds of the ordinary members of the public, but also embarked on a crusading enterprise to make and reap immense commercial gains from the extremely traumatic ordeals she and her little child continue to be subjected to, by the persistent false, injurious and sensational publications of and concerning her.
Karen Baaba Sam states that in their (the defendants’) quest to defame her for commercial gain, the Defendants flagrantly disregarded laws against the publication that identifies a child in domestic abuse and custody matters.
Karen Baaba Sam adds that “the Defendants went to the extent of procuring persons holding offices in both the public service and the private sector, mainly in the security, communication and information services, and funded by Kwadwo Adjei, to procure statutorily restricted records about the her and her little child, to perpetrate their defamatory, damaging and injurious conduct against her and her little child.
“Plaintiff (Baaba Sam) adds that the images published were illegally procured from security footage from CCTV surveillance cameras installed at places such as the airports, in gross violation of the rights of Ms Baaba Sam and her little child.”
In light of the harm caused, Ms Baaba Sam is seeking eight reliefs. First is a declaration that the defendants’ publications are defamatory. Second, a declaration that the defendants’ publications violate the statutorily guaranteed rights of protection and security of her and her little child “O”.
Third, General damages for defamation. Fourth, general damages for the egregious violation of the guaranteed rights of protection and security of the Plaintiff (Ms Baaba Sam) and her little child. Fifth, aggravated, punitive, as well as exemplary damages for the defendants’ grossly unwarranted and unjustified publications.”
Sixth, an order compelling the defendants to issue a written retraction of the defamatory statements and render an unqualified apology to Ms Baaba Sam and her little child.”
Seventh, “an order for defendants to publish the retraction and apology in a coloured, front-page publication in the Daily Graphic newspaper, and additionally through the same channels they published the defamatory statements on three consecutive occasions.”
Lastly, “an order restraining the defendants from any further defamatory and otherwise injurious publications of and concerning Ms Karen Baaba Sam and her little child.”
The post Baaba Sam sues New Crusading Guide, others for defamation appeared first on The Herald ghana.
